At 08:50 AM 12/12/97 +0100, Sten Anderson wrote: >Tommy Lakofski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> whoops, this should have gone to the list too. >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> On Thu, 11 Dec 1997, Hamish Moffatt wrote: >> > [ I said: ] >> > > >It is NOT necessary for the last command to be started with exec. In >> > > >fact, exec should only be used on the window manager, and only if that >> > > >is the last command in .xinitrc. The problem is more likely the use of >> > > >&'s. Every program started in .xinitrc should have & appended EXCEPT >> > > >the window manager. >> >> Doesn't a /bin/sh stick around if you don't use exec? Or did that change >> at some point? I think I put exec in my .xsession before the windowmanager >> when I first installed debian (buzz) to make the /bin/sh go away, and it's >> been there ever since. > >Yes, by using exec to launch a command from a script, the process >associated with the script (/bin/sh) is replaced by the process >associated with the command. This saves a few system resources, since >the script process is not laying sleeping in the background for no >purpose. The program pstree is an excellent tool to see the effect of >this. However, the improvement of performance by this is barely >measurable. I am simply arguing that while it is generally a good >idea to uses exec, it is not that important, and certainly not >required. In fact it might give you some unexpected effects, if exec >is used on anything else than the last command in a script. >
The last line of my .xinitrc file 'exec's a window manager without the ampersand and so far, I have installed all window managers and by far they all worked except for olvwm. Any other suggestions? Thanks, Bryan -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
